joe-zias

Even if you agree with the notion that lawsuits are a legitimate means to settle disputes, I hope you’ll consider the effects on scholarship if film-makers like Mr Jacobovici sue persons who disagree with their conclusions. First they came for Joe Zias because he criticized Simcha’s work and next they’ll come for you when you write a review of a book that doesn’t please its author or its publisher.

You can sign the petition urging Simcha to drop his suit here (where you can also see the list of signatories).

As of this morning 40 persons from around the world have joined in, calling on Mr Jacobovici to drop his suit against Mr Zias. There’s still time if you’d care to lend your voice. Just go here for the details and the petition link.

1- Because suing persons with whom one disagrees over ideological matters and scholarly issues is inappropriate.

2- Because Joe Zias certainly isn’t the only person to object to Mr Jacobovici’s various ‘findings’ and thus shouldn’t be singled out in what for all appearances looks to be a simple vendetta.

3- And though we certainly understand that every person is free to travel legal avenues to redress wrongs, we feel that this suit simply harms the field of academic research and may stifle dissident voices to variant theories.

4- If successful, Mr. Jacobovici’s (who according to all accounts is a humorous and engaging person) action may inadvertently choke out dissident voices by means of monetary threatenings and academics simply cannot sit by and allow that chilling effect on scholarship to take place.

The BBC is reporting that the ‘lead codices’ are of doubtful authenticity! Ya don’t say…

But then the essay goes on to describe, in fine fashion, the very questionable nature of so many ridiculous claims. It even includes remarks by our own Joe Zias-

Joe Zias, an anthropologist who served for 25 years as a senior curator at the Israel Antiquities Authority, is equally sceptical. The golden rule in archaeology, he says, is simple – when you hear extraordinary claims, ask for extraordinary proof. Mr Zias says the world of archaeology has changed since Hollywood gave us first Indiana Jones and then the Da Vinci code.

And

Joe Zias says the odds are always against any such finding turning out to change the way we look at ancient history as the Dead Sea Scrolls once did. He says he has seen many people bringing artefacts to his museum during his quarter-century as a curator, but the only genuine one was a fragment of Byzantine pottery found by a tourist on Mount Sinai. “It wasn’t going back to the time of Moses, but in 25 years that’s the only thing I ever saw that was authentic,” he says. Now there are those who believe – just as Mr Saeda does – that the Lead Codices are genuine and that they hold important secrets about the ancient world. But the search for truth in the Holy Land has been littered with fakes and forgeries for hundreds of years and when great claims are made for a new discovery, the burden of proof lies with the finders. And the burden is a heavy one.

The BBC may be slow, but when they finally get around to the topic they do a far better job than the Discovery Channel and the History Channel do!

Another tv ‘special’ by some guy who lacks any real knowledge of the subject, as Deane shows plainly, is set to air in NZ on Sunday. I especially appreciate Deane’s observation-

… the list of biblical scholars demonstrates Bruce’s lack of knowledge of the field, his reliance on other people’s scholarship, and lack of first-hand knowledge of scholarship. Where are the current and most recent experts on the issue: Maurice Casey? Dale Allison? Roger Aus? They are nowhere to be seen, although they are obvious choices for anybody reasonably informed on current scholarship.

I’m kind of glad I’m not in NZ so I don’t have to watch.

This Sunday, 24 July 2011, at 8:30pm, Bryan Bruce will try to find out who killed Jesus, in a television documentary to be screened on New Zealand’s TV1. The documentary is one in an ongoing series in which Bruce examines old unsolved murders, and attempts to solve them … but with the twist that, here, the cadaver is 2000 years old … Read More